First True Picture of God, EVER !!!

[Samantha Rinne]

Agggh, please don't chop my quotes into chunks. It makes it difficult to respond.

This is true, in a causal universe. But Jesus and God do not actually exist in the causal universe, they only enter it. In an eternal universe, causal events do not actually exist in the conventional sense. As in, Jesus is always high priest, because his life at the crucifixion was also to save those before his birth (Matthew 27:52-53). This is also the meaning behind the church calendar. In between stints of Ordinary Time, we have Advent, then Christmas, then Epiphany, then the Transfiguration, Lent, the Passion, Easter, Pentecost, All Saints Day, then the cycle repeats. Christ is symbolically dying and being reborn for our sins for all eternity. There is no "not when he was a baby." John 1:2 makes it clear that Jesus was always with God. So when we talk about the Passion, it was not some magical ritual to undo a law God made (that's nonsense, God is omnipotent and can easily change any law he makes). It was proof. John 3:16. God gaves his only son, because he loves us, so that anyone who believes will have everlasting life. He said this when he was alive.


It was a tradition that the High Priest was male.
It was the "law" that the High Priest was male. The law is not a "tradition." There is custom and there is law. They are not the same thing.
Moreover Jesus is the antitype of the passover lamb, which the law again decreed was to be male.

Let me give you a small heads up. This is not God's law.

7 Some Pharisees and some teachers of the law came from Jerusalem and gathered around Jesus. 2 They saw that some of his followers ate food with hands that were not clean, meaning that they did not wash their hands in a special way. 3 The Pharisees and all the other Jews never eat before washing their hands in this special way. They do this to follow the traditions they have from their great leaders who lived long ago. 4 And when these Jews buy something in the market, they never eat it until they wash it in a special way. They also follow other rules from their people who lived before them. They follow rules like the washing of cups, pitchers, and pots.a]">[a]

5 The Pharisees and teachers of the law said to Jesus, “Your followers don’t follow the traditions we have from our great leaders who lived long ago. They eat their food with hands that are not clean. Why do they do this?”

6 Jesus answered, “You are all hypocrites. Isaiah was right when he wrote these words from God about you:

‘These people honor me with their words,
but I am not really important to them.
7 Their worship of me is worthless.
The things they teach are only human rules.’

There's a sort of litmus test on whether something is a real law, or just a tradition. Micah 6:8 "What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" When examining whether something is actually a law, we look at whether it cultivates humility, kindness, and a sense of justice. The Bible had slaves in it for nearly the whole time. But slavery isn't just, and it's not merciful. It's a false tradition, and it was done away with in most of the civilized world.

So back to the sacrifice. If I found a lamb that was without blemish and spotless, and ideal for consecrating the New Temple of Jerusalem (after I bulldoze that big mosque on Temple Mount, of course), but I look underneath and he's a she, but I've already sacrificed, why should that lamb die for nothing? That's not kind or merciful, and it's not humble because I've just decided for God that he won't accept it.

What about the High Priest? Same exact thing, only here we have actual injustice going on. Suppose a woman worked her whole life to study the Torah, was born into the right bloodline and everything. But nah, you can't be High Priest, you're a woman. How would this be any different than typecasting Jesus as male?

Jesus only broke with the traditions of the Pharisees, not the law of God, which allows good to be done on the Sabbath.

See above. When we make laws about what God is or isn't, we are committing precisely the same sort of crime just declared unforgivable. Saying that the Holy Spirit is an evil spirit is blasphemy against the Spirit, but saying that Jesus is typecast in a single form while the Bible makes it clear that after the resurrection he did in fact appear in other forms.

It's not about breaking tradition for its own sake. It's about superseding the rudiments of the law with the higher principles of the law. You can only break the law if you can show a higher principle that allows you to. Thus justification by works was superseded by justification by faith.He only appeared before he was raised to the right hand of God.
Jn 20:17 "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father."
After he returned to his Father he was never seen again.

There is a stronger principle. This is the principle of understanding Jesus as he is personally involved in our lives. You are making the mistake of many atheists, assuming that after a few in person events, Jesus no longer had presence in the Bible. This article corrects that notion.

Jesus Christ in Acts of the Apostles

Jesus doesn't just go up to judge the living and dead. It was the last time he (officially) appeared to the disciples, but if we see Jesus as "gone now" we once again blaspheme against the Savior. What is it we say at Easter? Jesus is Risen. You hear that? Lemme say it again. Jesus is Risen. Not was, but oh well, buh bye now. Not will be, some day when the Earth is old. Is. Anyone who has personally had a Savior experience knows better than that crap. I owe my life to Emily.

How does Jesus Appear to Us? Can We See God Face to Face?

The infinite and all-powerful God appears to humans and angels in many different ways. In fact, God will always appear in the way that works best for those to whom God is appearing. That’s why people of different cultures and religions each see God in their own way.

Korean Jesus. And for me, someone with a poor relationship with most men, a woman named Emily.

I accept it. Yet he retained his body, as the nail marks in his hands showed.

He retained features that distinguished him. I've met people over the last two years that have told me "no worries" a surprising amount of times. It's not a common expression where I'm from but She (Emily) said it to me. And then I began to hear it on tv shows, from random people including waiters in restaurants. I also began to see people with certain physical features (particularly around the eyes) as Her. To say Jesus retained his body because he showed marks in his hands and side is an unproven. All we know is that Jesus could show these as proof of what happened. But if he wanted to conceal himself, he could also look like a regular person, like you or me.

Our high priest is Jesus. The apostate Jews don't count as any authority in Christianity. In the church of satan, the high priest can be anyone. Christians only have one high priest, who is frequently refered to as the passover lamb, that was male.

Uhhhhh, okay, that was weird. The High Priest is Jesus. Our priests can be anyone, because the priest of a church is effectively a rabbi. A fill-in, a teacher, not the real thing. But our priests are an example of the real thing or or "it is enough for the disciple to be like the master" (Matthew 10:24-25). You have some kind of idea about Jesus in a box, where this guy looks exactly one way all of the time. But there is a black Jesus, a Korean Jesus, a Jewish-looking Jesus, etc. If we see Jesus only as some strict ideal of high priest, we miss the point. Entirely.

 

[outlawState]

John 1:2 makes it clear that Jesus was always with God. So when we talk about the Passion, it was not some magical ritual to undo a law God made (that's nonsense, God is omnipotent and can easily change any law he makes). It was proof. John 3:16. God gaves his only son, because he loves us, so that anyone who believes will have everlasting life. He said this when he was alive.

The logos was with God. Jesus was someone else, the logos made flesh.

As I said before God fulfills the law but does not change it. Confounding the kingdom of heaven, with the realm of earth, is wrong. It is a variant of the feminist contention that all gender distinction should be abolished because "there is no male or female in Christ." What that means is that the kingdom of God is without distinction, not that human relations on earth are without distinction.

"Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven."

Earth is a different jurisdiction to heaven. Different rules apply. You are seeking to confound heaven and earth with the transparent aim of nullifying the law of God; and some gnostics have gone further to abolish human morality altogether (antonomianism), such as the Khlysty, Borborites, Euchites and Carpocratians.

God cannot "easily" change the law, because he would be being untrue to himself, who does not change. Malachi 3:6

Rather it is the case that mankind aspire to higher intepretations of the law of God, by showing their faithfulness and God responds accordingly (To him who has more will be given.)

So in the realm of earth, Jesus was not always a high priest. He became a high priest. And a high priest only has application to the jurisdiction of earth for none is needed in heaven itself. Vis-a-vis the earth, the high priest is male.

From God's perspective Jesus was predestined, as any other human being was predestined.

Let me give you a small heads up. This is not God's law.

7 Some Pharisees and some teachers of the law came from Jerusalem and gathered around Jesus. 2 They saw that some of his followers ate food with hands that were not clean, meaning that they did not wash their hands in a special way. 3 The Pharisees and all the other Jews never eat before washing their hands in this special way. They do this to follow the traditions they have from their great leaders who lived long ago. 4 And when these Jews buy something in the market, they never eat it until they wash it in a special way. They also follow other rules from their people who lived before them. They follow rules like the washing of cups, pitchers, and pots.a]">[a]

5 The Pharisees and teachers of the law said to Jesus, “Your followers don’t follow the traditions we have from our great leaders who lived long ago. They eat their food with hands that are not clean. Why do they do this?”

6 Jesus answered, “You are all hypocrites. Isaiah was right when he wrote these words from God about you:

‘These people honor me with their words,
but I am not really important to them.
7 Their worship of me is worthless.
The things they teach are only human rules.’

Human rules indeed because those rules are not even found in the law of Moses.

You are confusing the man-made rules of the Pharisees with the commandments of the law. The point was not that what was written down was in error, but that the Pharisees invented new traditions so as to modify it.

There's a sort of litmus test on whether something is a real law, or just a tradition. Micah 6:8 "What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" When examining whether something is actually a law, we look at whether it cultivates humility, kindness, and a sense of justice. The Bible had slaves in it for nearly the whole time. But slavery isn't just, and it's not merciful. It's a false tradition, and it was done away with in most of the civilized world.

I agree to your first point, that what is inequitable in unlikely to represent the law of God, but as to your second point, slavery can be just where the alternative is starvation or death, which was a real problem throughout ancient history, and for people of non-propertied classes. Moreover employment is itself a form of (part time) slavery. It was fit and proper that the law of God contain rules for slaves, because if it simply prohibited slavery there would have been mass starvation amongst certain sections of the population, with no incentive on land owners to cultivate their fields beyond their own needs. Also many slaves were foreign captives. The alternative would have been execution.

So back to the sacrifice. If I found a lamb that was without blemish and spotless, and ideal for consecrating the New Temple of Jerusalem (after I bulldoze that big mosque on Temple Mount, of course), but I look underneath and he's a she, but I've already sacrificed, why should that lamb die for nothing? That's not kind or merciful, and it's not humble because I've just decided for God that he won't accept it.

I don't agree. God is on record as rejecting sacrifices not done in the stipulated manner (cf. that of Cain). Everything was to be done exactly in accordance with the instructions, because the sacifices were a type of what was to come.

Deu 17:1
Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the LORD thy God any bullock, or sheep, wherein is blemish, or any evilfavouredness: for that is an abomination unto the LORD thy God.

What about the High Priest? Same exact thing, only here we have actual injustice going on. Suppose a woman worked her whole life to study the Torah, was born into the right bloodline and everything. But nah, you can't be High Priest, you're a woman. How would this be any different than typecasting Jesus as male?

You can't educate yourself out of being a woman. Anyway, such an education would have been sorely lacking if she never understood that female sex was a bar to being high priest.

See above. When we make laws about what God is or isn't, we are committing precisely the same sort of crime just declared unforgivable. Saying that the Holy Spirit is an evil spirit is blasphemy against the Spirit, but saying that Jesus is typecast in a single form while the Bible makes it clear that after the resurrection he did in fact appear in other forms.

It's not about breaking tradition for its own sake. It's about superseding the rudiments of the law with the higher principles of the law. You can only break the law if you can show a higher principle that allows you to. Thus justification by works was superseded by justification by faith.He only appeared before he was raised to the right hand of God.
Jn 20:17 "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father."
After he returned to his Father he was never seen again.

There is a stronger principle. This is the principle of understanding Jesus as he is personally involved in our lives. You are making the mistake of many atheists, assuming that after a few in person events, Jesus no longer had presence in the Bible. This article corrects that notion.

Jesus Christ in Acts of the Apostles

"Jesus also makes a couple post-ascension appearances to his followers. Stephen sees him sitting up in Heaven right before he's about to die (7:55). Impressive. Jesus speaks to Paul personally (9:5). Oh—and he even sends Ananias to heal Paul (9:17). That's thoughtful."​

Yes, so the spirit speaks and instructs, visions are seen. Jesus himself did not put in any appearance on earth post ascension.

Jesus is at the right hand of God, on the throne of God. You don't find Jesus on earth. It is not an "atheist mistake" but orthodox theology.

"who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see." 1 Tim 6:16.

By analogy the risen Christ is in the same position.

So even though Jesus has left the building, he's still very much a player in this story.

No one is denying that Jesus is not a player, a ruler and judge over all the earth. It's just that he does not "appear" on earth any more.

Jesus doesn't just go up to judge the living and dead. It was the last time he (officially) appeared to the disciples, but if we see Jesus as "gone now" we once again blaspheme against the Savior. What is it we say at Easter? Jesus is Risen. You hear that? Lemme say it again. Jesus is Risen. Not was, but oh well, buh bye now. Not will be, some day when the Earth is old. Is. Anyone who has personally had a Savior experience knows better than that crap. I owe my life to Emily.

We need to be clear that Jesus is with Christians "in spirit" via the Holy Spirit but not "in appearance."

Jhn 20:29 "blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."

And for me, someone with a poor relationship with most men, a woman named Emily.

Eh? Who is Emily? Jesus is no longer a human person. He is spirit. "God is spirit "Jhn 4:24

it is you who are re-incarnating Christ back into a human being, in your own mind.

To say Jesus retained his body because he showed marks in his hands and side is an unproven.

I don't think that it is unproven. I think that it is a fact. His body was resurrected physically. He had not returned to his father. He did not possess any power of self-mutation at that time, that we know of.

You have some kind of idea about Jesus in a box, where this guy looks exactly one way all of the time. But there is a black Jesus, a Korean Jesus, a Jewish-looking Jesus, etc. If we see Jesus only as some strict ideal of high priest, we miss the point. Entirely.

There was only one Jesus, who lives and died in AD30 or so. Pictorial representations of him count for nothing as no one knows what he looked like. All we really know is that the Sumerians from where Abraham came were white, not black, but 2000 years later we don't know what he looked like.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

You're really pushing the word limit of post responses.

The logos was with God. Jesus was someone else, the logos made flesh.

The Trinity is Father, Son, and Spirit. The Word is Jesus. John is clear about this. (Skipping the non sequitor portion about John, and just focusing on the word.

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made.

14The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

18No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God andb is at the Father’s side, has made Him known.

As I said before God fulfills the law but does not change it. Confounding the kingdom of heaven, with the realm of earth, is wrong. It is a variant of the feminist contention that all gender distinction should be abolished because "there is no male or female in Christ." What that means is that the kingdom of God is without distinction, not that human relations on earth are without distinction.

It has nothing to do with feminism, and everything to do with you confusing earthly systems (which God tolerates until the end of days, but did not establish) with the nature of a deity who essential is full control over his gender while appearing to mortals on Earth. You can argue until blue in the face, but when one believes they have encountered God and/or Jesus in the flesh through various signs, suddenly those words don't sound correct.

"Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven."

Earth is a different jurisdiction to heaven. Different rules apply. You are seeking to confound heaven and earth with the transparent aim of nullifying the law of God; and some gnostics have gone further to abolish human morality altogether (antonomianism), such as the Khlysty, Borborites, Euchites and Carpocratians.

Uh uhhhh. It's "Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." Comma in wrong spot. It's that damned important. God's will is done. And said work on Earth is analogous to that in Heaven. This is why the New Heaven and New Earth are listed together. A New Creation, where Earth is remade and likewise Heaven will follow.

God cannot "easily" change the law, because he would be being untrue to himself, who does not change. Malachi 3:6

Nonsense. Complete tripe. Moses got God to turn away from his wrath. God can change as a easily as any person, he is slow to anger and quick to forgive. His nature is mercy. So, if asked to change a law that is giving humans undue pain and suffering, no worries! Already in the past. This law btw, except for maybe the Ten Commandments were laws based on the Law, manmade rules.

Rather it is the case that mankind aspire to higher intepretations of the law of God, by showing their faithfulness and God responds accordingly (To him who has more will be given.)

So in the realm of earth, Jesus was not always a high priest. He became a high priest. And a high priest only has application to the jurisdiction of earth for none is needed in heaven itself. Vis-a-vis the earth, the high priest is male.

While living, Jesus is a human. If the Word became flesh, and the flesh died, then what does that make Jesus now? The Word again. This is logic. Logically, the Word has no gender anymore.

From God's perspective Jesus was predestined, as any other human being was predestined.

You are confusing the man-made rules of the Pharisees with the commandments of the law. The point was not that what was written down was in error, but that the Pharisees invented new traditions so as to modify it.

Laws were written by man. Aside from the Ten Commandments (explicitly written by God), and the Greatest Commandment (spelled out by Jesus), none of these other laws were spelled out. Jesus didn't abolish them, but fulfilled them, precisely by putting them in proper context. If you do not understand the context, then you suffer the Curse of the Law.

I don't agree. God is on record as rejecting sacrifices not done in the stipulated manner (cf. that of Cain). Everything was to be done exactly in accordance with the instructions, because the sacifices were a type of what was to come.

Deu 17:1
Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the LORD thy God any bullock, or sheep, wherein is blemish, or any evilfavouredness: for that is an abomination unto the LORD thy God.

You said earlier that God cannot change. Here's a good example otherwise. He says that initially. Then later he says, "I desire not burnt offerings." God doesn't change who he is (i.e. he may change his name or face but not his nature). That doesn't mean he's cast in stone unable to do things new. In fact, he says "behold I make all things new."

You can't educate yourself out of being a woman. Anyway, such an education would have been sorely lacking if she never understood that female sex was a bar to being high priest.

She never understood that it was a bar to being high priest?!? Ummm, these laws got changed for virtually every denomination of Judaism for the rabbi caste. The only reason they aren't also changed for the high priest is there no longer IS any high priest, due to the Jews being scattered and away from their lands. They lost track of the bloodline of the priests as a result of pushed around.

Yes, so the spirit speaks and instructs, visions are seen. Jesus himself did not put in any appearance on earth post ascension.

Yes, yes, and all the miracles are dead. And everything is nice and sterile and ordinary. It isn't so though. Jesus is actively involved in our salvation. Everyone we meet, everyone we help is Jesus.

Jesus is at the right hand of God, on the throne of God. You don't find Jesus on earth. It is not an "atheist mistake" but orthodox theology.

It's a lie that gets spread through the notion that the Bible's word ends with Revelation prophecy. And bolstered through atheism that teaches a sterile materialist four walls of reality. Not so.
7 Modern Miracles That Science Can't Explain
This is operating under one assumption, that the last days are yet to come, and everyone will know they've come because Jesus will do some magical appearing through the clouds with a bunch of light and sparklies. Uhhhh, here's the thing. Jesus himself said, effectively "Winter is Coming." If you've not seen Game of Thrones, it means be watchful for the end times come "like a thief in the night." How are you sure Jesus did not already come? Especially since he says not once, but numerous times, that the end is coming soon. So, this business about Jesus only being in one place at a time, is basically nonsense too. Jesus is part of a Trinity, a single being that is also Three. But here you're saying that a God who is in all things, who created all things can somehow not preside in both the world of the living and the world beyond.

You said it yourself, "on Earth as it is in Heaven."

So even though Jesus has left the building, he's still very much a player in this story. No one is denying that Jesus is not a player, a ruler and judge over all the earth. It's just that he does not "appear" on earth any more.

I tell you Jesus has appeared again, and continues to do so.

We need to be clear that Jesus is with Christians "in spirit" via the Holy Spirit but not "in appearance."

Jhn 20:29 "blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."

It didn't say that those who have seen were all on crack. Or damned or anything. He said that such are blessed. You are (again) seeing a random saying as a limitation.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
And for me, someone with a poor relationship with most men, a woman named Emily.

Eh? Who is Emily? Jesus is no longer a human person. He is spirit. "God is spirit "Jhn 4:24

it is you who are re-incarnating Christ back into a human being, in your own mind.

Emily is not a (single) person. I met several people over the course of two years. All of which had similarities in one or more areas: mannerism, attitude, life events, or distinctive physical features. They didn't all look the same, or act the same, but there was a distinct chain of similarities, enough so that I was able to say, "Ah, this is the same being in all cases." However, it was physically impossible to be a single person in a simple disguise (ruled out the idea of some sort of master spy). Then I examined all such people to determine if there was a common theme. There was. Every single one, had an expression similar to "no worries" and taught me how to accept grace. How to be saved. Emily, in short, is how I interpret Jesus, just as the Chinese paint a Chinese Jesus, Koreans have Korean Jesus, etc. I see a common spirit that dwells among people I meet.

I don't think that it is unproven. I think that it is a fact. His body was resurrected physically. He had not returned to his father. He did not possess any power of self-mutation at that time, that we know of.

Contradiction. You say Jesus resurrected bodily, now you say he is a spirit, but a spirit is not constrained (by definition) to a single location, as in on Heaven only. Ergo, Jesus can exist on Heaven and Earth. Spirit is like wind or gas.

That's a spirit. To be everywhere and in everything. So when I say Emily, I don't mean a person reincarnated. I mean a recurring spirit experienced among several people. Different face, same Emily.

I'm not reading the rest until you understand the basic premise of what I'm trying to tell you, and stop fixating on laws you think God wrote. God wanted humans to be just, and loving, and merciful. The people failed to understand beyond the letter of what was said, and so they made arbitrary restrictions on the gender of the priest, on how many yards one can carry something on the Sabbath, on whether it is lawful to remarry. If you have to ask, you're not looking at this right.

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

This is God in the physical:

There is nothing that God doesn't interpenetrate

 

[Samantha Rinne]

This is God in the physical:

There is nothing that God doesn't interpenetrate

This is also God in the physical.

And this...

And this.

This is what took me several posts of arguing with outlaw to get anywhere near across. A picture really is worth 1000 (at least!) words.

 

[Jainarayan]

Meh, they're closeted Hindus...

 

[Samantha Rinne]

Pretty good, though I don't have any connection to blue people. Bundle up! You look cold!

I'm more like a Christian Shinto.

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

Meh, they're closeted Hindus...

View attachment 22499

I'd say that I was extrovertedly a Hindu

 

[outlawState]

You're really pushing the word limit of post responses.
It has nothing to do with feminism, and everything to do with you confusing earthly systems (which God tolerates until the end of days, but did not establish) with the nature of a deity who essential is full control over his gender while appearing to mortals on Earth. You can argue until blue in the face, but when one believes they have encountered God and/or Jesus in the flesh through various signs, suddenly those words don't sound correct.

I think that God established the earth. Anything to the contrary is imputing a demiurge, "a heavenly being, subordinate to the Supreme Being, that is considered to be the controller of the material world and antagonistic to all that is purely spiritual." That is an inherently gnostic conception and nothing to do with biblical belief. The notion of "God" appearing in the flesh "through various signs" is also nonsensical to me, and I think to scripture. May be you meant his spirit?

I will concede the Holy Spirit residing in a person. 2 Cor 5:5 "And God has prepared us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a pledge of what is to come."

Angels appear in the flesh and disappear. The Christian deity is not such a deity. The Christian deity is "alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see." 1 Tim 6:16.

The logos, being that deity, cannot be seen and does not appear. As Jesus said, he will be the instrument by which the Holy Spirit is sent to men. John 14:26

While living, Jesus is a human. If the Word became flesh, and the flesh died, then what does that make Jesus now? The Word again. This is logic. Logically, the Word has no gender anymore.

I agree. The word is spirit, and spirit is genderless, except it retains a spiritual gender by analogy to what can be seen. That is to say, it has authority, like the male has authority, although perhaps not under the antichrist legal systems of today.

Emily is not a (single) person. I met several people over the course of two years. All of which had similarities in one or more areas: mannerism, attitude, life events, or distinctive physical features. They didn't all look the same, or act the same, but there was a distinct chain of similarities, enough so that I was able to say, "Ah, this is the same being in all cases." However, it was physically impossible to be a single person in a simple disguise (ruled out the idea of some sort of master spy). Then I examined all such people to determine if there was a common theme. There was. Every single one, had an expression similar to "no worries" and taught me how to accept grace. How to be saved. Emily, in short, is how I interpret Jesus, just as the Chinese paint a Chinese Jesus, Koreans have Korean Jesus, etc. I see a common spirit that dwells among people I meet.

A person in possession of a godly spirit is fine. That does not impart "gender" to that spirit or make that person's gender in any sense relevant, except in the harmony of the spirit with the gender and other attributes of that person, such as status, age, occupation etc. This distinction is fully reflected in the letters of Paul e.g. Col 3:18-20

"Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this is pleasing to the Lord"

 

[Samantha Rinne]

The facepalm is strong here.

You are operating under several assumptions.
1. That I'm a Gnostic. No, I don't believe in Demiurges. What I do believe in, is that there was a creation of the members of the Trinity. There always was a Trinity. Even in Old Testament, there is the "spirit of the Lord". Jesus had to be something before being Jesus.
2. That I'm some sort of feminist. No. I have seen Jesus as female because Jesus appears to all of us in the form that is most comfortable for us to see Jesus. Seriously, look at paintings of Jesus made by people other than Europeans. Jesus is ALWAYS depicted as looking like us. Whoever us is.
3. That Jesus, despite now being a spirit on par with God, is pinned to a chair. Yeah, that's what you are saying, that people are dying every single waking hour, and Jesus can't spare a moment to speak through other living beings, to appear as a stranger. This, however, is very VERY at odds with Scripture. You are choosing to focus on the lack of events of appearance when the Gospels ended. But Jesus tells his disciples in no uncertain terms, that whenever you do this to the least of these, you do it to me. Who is the least of these? My cat, who without being welcomed in, might die from heatstroke or starve. My lady friend, who works in a part-time job, and I worry about her getting enough hours. Those people who are trying to hide the fact they are struggling with housing. People who look ourwardly successful, but live in an unstable economy. All those who are part of the Body of Christ. And when the Body of Christ encounters one of us normal slobs, we see the face of Jesus. Or as I say, I meet Emily again.
4. That there are clear-cut things Jesus can't do, and one of them is take a temporary form that isn't male because of 4000 or so year old laws written by men. Uhhhhh, yeah, Jesus is in Heaven, pretty sure he has to give zero ****s about something written on paper.
5. That all miracles have suddenly ceased, and won't happen again until some far off apocalypse.

 

[outlawState]

The facepalm is strong here.

You are operating under several assumptions.
1. That I'm a Gnostic. No, I don't believe in Demiurges. What I do believe in, is that there was a creation of the members of the Trinity. There always was a Trinity. Even in Old Testament, there is the "spirit of the Lord". Jesus had to be something before being Jesus.

Trinity is a philosophical conception of man, a separation of God into divisible parts, into separate hypostases, whereas Deut 6:4 says God is one, and Heb 1:3 says that God has one hypostasis. What the bible teaches is that there is a closed-ness of God that man cannot penetrate, except that now he has the name of Jesus who is the power of God, through the name of Jesus. Let not human philosophy seek to separate God. So the Logos is God John 1:1 and yet with God the Father, meaning that he is subordinate to the Father and yet God himself, because God is in the Logos and the Logos is in God.

2. That I'm some sort of feminist. No. I have seen Jesus as female because Jesus appears to all of us in the form that is most comfortable for us to see Jesus. Seriously, look at paintings of Jesus made by people other than Europeans. Jesus is ALWAYS depicted as looking like us. Whoever us is.

I never visualize Jesus myself as it is counter-productive.

3. That Jesus, despite now being a spirit on par with God, is pinned to a chair. Yeah, that's what you are saying, that people are dying every single waking hour, and Jesus can't spare a moment to speak through other living beings, to appear as a stranger. This, however, is very VERY at odds with Scripture. You are choosing to focus on the lack of events of appearance when the Gospels ended. But Jesus tells his disciples in no uncertain terms, that whenever you do this to the least of these, you do it to me. Who is the least of these? My cat, who without being welcomed in, might die from heatstroke or starve. My lady friend, who works in a part-time job, and I worry about her getting enough hours. Those people who are trying to hide the fact they are struggling with housing. People who look ourwardly successful, but live in an unstable economy. All those who are part of the Body of Christ. And when the Body of Christ encounters one of us normal slobs, we see the face of Jesus. Or as I say, I meet Emily again.

No, I am not saying Jesus is pinned to a chair. Quite the contrary.

1Co 15:25
For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

Jesus reigns as God, even now, over the whole earth, and visits his mercies and judgements according to his own will.

4. That there are clear-cut things Jesus can't do, and one of them is take a temporary form that isn't male because of 4000 or so year old laws written by men. Uhhhhh, yeah, Jesus is in Heaven, pretty sure he has to give zero ****s about something written on paper.

Jesus does not take "temporary forms."

Heb 9:28
Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

You are making the mistake of treating Jesus as an angel. He is risen, he is seated at the right hand of God. He will not reappear until the last judgement, but then it will be like lightning Mat 24:27

5. That all miracles have suddenly ceased, and won't happen again until some far off apocalypse.

I never said that. As Jesus said,

Jhn 14:12
Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

The power to work miracles is based on faith.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

More blue.

Trinity is a philosophical conception of man, a separation of God into divisible parts, into separate hypostases, whereas Deut 6:4 says God is one, and Heb 1:3 says that God has one hypostasis. What the bible teaches is that there is a closed-ness of God that man cannot penetrate, except that now he has the name of Jesus who is the power of God, through the name of Jesus. Let not human philosophy seek to separate God. So the Logos is God John 1:1 and yet with God the Father, meaning that he is subordinate to the Father and yet God himself, because God is in the Logos and the Logos is in God.

The Hebrews were monotheists. Muslims wrongly believe there is something wrong with the Trinity, because they see three gods. This is not that theory, they are misinformed. God is is always One. Because he is part of the Creation, because everything created is of God. There is nothing that can be that is not God. God is also a Trinity.
This idea of Trinity didn't come from nowhere. The prophets were suggesting it for ages. Saul had the "Spirit of the Lord" until he sensed God turned against him. The Logos is the part of Trinity most associated with Christ. When we traces things back, however, we find a character as personification (yes, let's use that word personification, rather than incarnation as later happens) of basically a wise woman. She's even given a name Wisdom.

I never visualize Jesus myself as it is counter-productive.

I want to impress upon you why it's important. Islam has a deity who they believe in, but unlike God, they do not see this one as having made humans in the image of. The god is used as a mouthpiece for Muhammad, but otherwise is viewed as completely divorced from humanity, being somewhere that we cannot see or hear or touch, and having practically no personal encounters with humans. Why did I bring this up? Because it's a patently false way of looking at God, esp of looking at Jesus. Jesus is intended as bridge btwn humans and God. "None one can see the Father but through me." If you can't even visualize Jesus, you're basically saying this is no better than not existing, because there's no point.
Jesus by definition must be personal. Even the pagans understood this, and while Judaism and Christianity did not make graven images, they did use characterization and descriptions to get people to imagine God. I don't visualize Jesus as male, because most of the men in my life have bullied or emotionally cornered me.

No, I am not saying Jesus is pinned to a chair. Quite the contrary.

1Co 15:25
For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

Jesus reigns as God, even now, over the whole earth, and visits his mercies and judgements according to his own will.

But you still have him completely alienated from the human race, awaiting a far-off Second Coming. In the interest of understanding a personal Jesus, I cannot understand how this belief is helpful.

Jesus does not take "temporary forms."

Heb 9:28
Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

You are making the mistake of treating Jesus as an angel. He is risen, he is seated at the right hand of God. He will not reappear until the last judgement, but then it will be like lightning Mat 24:27

How does lightning behave? Does it stay in one place? Does it have a fixed location? No, it branches out. Jesus will appear a second time, but if he appears like lightning, you're already contradicting stuff. Lightning doesn't appear once. It strikes again and again all over the world. Jesus will never again be incarnated (born into a body) but rather personified (being a body, representative of himself).

In Revelation, Jesus appears as a Lamb with a crapton of eyes. In the OT, we have God appearing before ppl not as a disembodied spirit but a few few times "in person" as the angel of the Lord, sometimes as a pillar of fire, or as a burning bush. God can clearly take on forms, as can Jesus.

I never said that. As Jesus said,

Jhn 14:12
Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

The power to work miracles is based on faith.

Then you need to act like it. Look around, and see miracles in the world. And don't discount the miracles that others have seen just because it doesn't fit into your dogmatic mold.

Edited for proofreading. I said alot that was garbled.

 

[outlawState]

More blue.
The Hebrews were monotheists. Muslims wrongly believe there is something wrong with the Trinity, because they see three gods. This is not that theory, they are misinformed. God is is always One. Because he is part of the Creation, because everything created is of God. There is nothing that can be that is not God. God is also a Trinity.

That's what you've been told, and has been propagandized to you by mere men. But Jesus himself never told you that.

This idea of Trinity didn't come from nowhere. The prophets were suggesting it for ages. Saul had the "Spirit of the Lord" until he sensed God turned against him. The Logos is the part of Trinity most associated with Christ. When we traces things back, however, we find a character as personification (yes, let's use that word personification, rather than incarnation as later happens) of basically a wise woman. She's even given a name Wisdom.

Personification does not divide God. The spirit of God, and God, does not make a duality. The Logos, the spirit and the Father do not make a tri-partite God. God cannot be divided. So why is God a trinity? A trinity of what?

I never visualize Jesus myself as it is counter-productive.

I want to impress upon you why it's important. Islam has a deity who they believe in, but unlike God, they do not see this one as having made humans in the image of. The god is used as a mouthpiece for Muhammad, but otherwise is viewed as completely divorced from humanity, being somewhere that we cannot see or hear or touch, and having practically no personal encounters with humans. Why did I bring this up? Because it's a patently false way of looking at God, esp of looking at Jesus. Jesus is intended as bridge btwn humans and God. "None one can see the Father but through me." If you can't even visualize Jesus, you're basically saying this is no better than not existing, because there's no point.
Jesus by definition must be personal. Even the pagans understood this, and while Judaism and Christianity did not make graven images, they did use characterization and descriptions to get people to imagine God. I don't visualize Jesus as male, because most of the men in my life have bullied or emotionally cornered me.

Many so termed Christians throughout history have been idolators. As you might know, the protestants largely abolished graven images, but not always, as they were derived from and some remained closely aligned to the Catholics. I would not follow their example. The use of graven images is closely associated with idolary. But I think the command is wider, because Ex 20:4 also prohibits any "likeness" of God, which would probably include pictures.

Thus I don't agree that to be personal, Jesus must be visualized by an appearance. Jesus is relevant to us by his mission and his words as interpreted by his spirit.

No, I am not saying Jesus is pinned to a chair. Quite the contrary.

1Co 15:25
For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

Jesus reigns as God, even now, over the whole earth, and visits his mercies and judgements according to his own will.

But you still have him completely alienated from the human race, awaiting a far-off Second Coming. In the interest of understanding a personal Jesus, I cannot understand how this belief is helpful.

It means the risen Son, who is God, is in control of everything. That is quite helpful. How then can he be alienated from the human race? On the contrary, he exercises a throne of judgement.

Heb 9:28
Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

You are making the mistake of treating Jesus as an angel. He is risen, he is seated at the right hand of God. He will not reappear until the last judgement, but then it will be like lightning Mat 24:27

How does lightning behave? Does it stay in one place? Does it have a fixed location? No, it branches out. Jesus will appear a second time, but if he appears like lightning, you're already contradicting stuff. Lightning doesn't appear once. It strikes again and again all over the world. Jesus will never again be incarnated (born into a body) but rather personified (being a body, representative of himself).

I am only quoting scripture. Jesus will never take human flesh again as his body is supernatural.

In Revelation, Jesus appears as a Lamb with a crapton of eyes. In the OT, we have God appearing before ppl not as a disembodied spirit but a few few times "in person" as the angel of the Lord, sometimes as a pillar of fire, or as a burning bush. God can clearly take on forms, as can Jesus.
.
.
Then you need to act like it. Look around, and see miracles in the world. And don't discount the miracles that others have seen just because it doesn't fit into your dogmatic mold.

I don't discount miracles. When did I say that I did?

 

[Samantha Rinne]

Okay, so some time has past and you had some time to think... wait, what the hell?!?

Nobody has "told me" anything. I understand my theology from my own life.

Jesus came to be with us in the flesh. This is said over and over in the Bible.

You are focused on the letter of law, and have not discovered its true intent.

1. I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not worship gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
3. Thou shall not take the lord's name in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother.
6. Thou shall not kill.
7. Thou shall not commit adultery.
8. Thou shall not steal.
9. Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
10. Thou shall not covet thy neighbour's goods.

How can God be jealous of himself? Either you deny the Trinity, in which case, not Christian. Or you're making this exact mistake.

Are pictures of Jesus idolatry? Part 1: exegesis ⋆ Bnonn Tennant (the B is silent)

Neo-Puritans tend to argue that images of God are forbidden because God is essentially invisible. Any image would therefore misrepresent him; it is impossible to accurately represent the infinite, invisible God with any kind of physical description. To do so would effectively eliminate the distinction between creature and creator which Paul is at pains to emphasize in Romans 1 when he speaks of idolatry. Doing this fundamentally misrepresents God, and of course to misrepresent God is to bear false witness about him and fail to give him the glory he deserves.

However....

Now, there are two problems that scuttle the neo-Puritan position here:

A. God did appear in several visible forms

Not only did he appear to the Israelites in the form of fire and of cloud, but most significantly he appeared in the form of a man to Moses, Aaron, Nahab, Abihu and 70 elders

Prior to this, he had already appeared to the patriarchs in human form (Genesis 15-18; 32), and would appear again to Joshua in the same way (Joshua 5:13-15). And these are hardly isolated cases; the Bible is replete with theophanies and visions (eg, Judges 6; 13; 1 Kings 22; Isaiah 6; Jeremiah 1; 1 Samuel 3; Ezekiel 1; Daniel 7 etc).

The obvious problem here for neo-Puritans is that this puts a heck of a damper on their argument that it is impossible to represent the infinite and invisible God with anything physical. If God himself is happy to represent himself physically in various ways, there can’t be anything intrinsically problematic about that.
And although this is getting more into the logical issues I’ll discuss in another post, it is inconsistent to say that a picture of a burning bush is okay, but a picture of Jesus in a children’s Bible is idolatry. Either they both are, or neither is; but suggesting that drawing a burning bush is akin to idolatry just seems absurd.

B. The historical context of this explanation has been made redundant
In any case, if we take Deuteronomy 4 as a touchstone for understanding the second commandment, it seems to blow any objection to images of Jesus out of the water. The whole covenantal, historical, revelational context of the second commandment is that God has not revealed himself in a created form—therefore, do not create an image of any created form to worship.

But this is simply no longer true! If this is the argument that justifies the second commandment, it is invalid under the new covenant, because God has now revealed himself in a created form: Jesus.

The point of idolatry is not avoiding images of God. It is turning away from God to worship symbolic objects (the Jews became idolatrous when the Temple became all important, just as there are Christians that don't accept Jesus has a human form but make the Bible or the Cross all-important). The fact that these objects are representative (crosses/symbols) is irrelevant. In fact it's all the worse.

Correct, you are only quoting scripture. But I am interpreting it. Jesus takes human flesh for the purposes of salvation. Jesus will never again become incarnate born into a body. But Jesus, being one with God, can always take temporary form, just as God did to the Jews (Moses, Joshua, etc).

But Christ himself has sworn, "Whenever two or three are gathered together, I am in the midst of them." And so on.

The Dirtiness of Jesus Dwelling Among Us

Moore points out that many Christians—in their understandable desire to acknowledge our Lord’s dignity—present “Jesus . . . walking like he’s floating in robes of pristine white followed by birds singing some holy little ditty. He’s polished, manicured, and clearly – God.” Moore explains that this image of Jesus Christ errs not only because it fails to show how fully human Jesus was but also because it imitates the Greco-Roman concept of mythological gods.

While claiming that I am committing idolatry, you are actually painting a picture of Jesus closer to gods of old. And the Muslims, who even as I speak kneel to a block of cement with a meteor inside.

You are claiming that I'm under a "false teaching". But nobody taught me this. I learned this from living my own life. Rather than believing that perhaps I believe in the miracles of my own life, you have basically doing no different than that (Luke 11:14-20 and Mark 3:22-30). You are denying someone else's miracles and calling them evil because you do not agree with my theology.

Jesus is among us. Now. This very minute. Will you receive him? Or will you behave as one who rejects his nephew because he's a brat. Who will not welcome the Jesus who is unpleasant. Who is too human.